AMUSING, INTERESTING, OUTRAGEOUS, or PROFOUND
This is a page for anything that's amusing, interesting, outrageous, or profound.
♦ ♦ ♦
RULES
❶ Each player gets six cards, except the player on the dealer's right, who gets seven.
❷ Posts, comments, and participants must be amusing, interesting, outrageous, or profound.
❸ This page uses Reverse Lemmy-Points™, or 'bad karma'. Please downvote all posts and comments.
❹ Posts, comments, and participants that are not amusing, interesting, outrageous, or profound will be removed.
❺ This is a non-smoking page. If you must smoke, please click away and come back later.
❻ Don't be a dick.
Please also abide by the instance rules.
♦ ♦ ♦
Can't get enough? Visit my blog.
♦ ♦ ♦
Please consider donating to Lemmy and Lemmy.World.
$5 a month is all they ask — an absurdly low price for a Lemmyverse of news, education, entertainment, and silly memes.
view the rest of the comments
Crony capitalism is how capitalism fails. It may be the likely end-state for capitalism, but we don't have enough experience with capitalism to know for certain.
The very fact that we call out crony capitalism means that we can see a world where capitalism can work better.
Think about sports. Cheating, betting on games by the players, the bribing of referees, steroid doping, using financial might to make the competition unfair: all those may be the end state of professional sports. It's something we always have to fight against, and it's a fight that's never won. That doesn't mean that sports should not exist because eventually they will be corrupted. It just means that those are things that we have to stay vigilant against. It's really the viewers / fans who have to keep the pressure on to keep things honest. If fans get fed up and refuse to watch, the sport collapses and dies. This has happened many times to professional sports leagues.
Adam Smith is widely seen as one of the main thinkers behind capitalism. He wrote The Wealth of Nations as a theoretical foundation for the system. In it, he is constantly warning about ways in which it can be corrupted if people aren't vigilant:
...
...
...
...
And on, and on, and on. Basically the foundational text on capitalism says "capitalism can be better than feudalism / manorialism, but those rich fuckers are always going to try to screw the people, so we need to keep them in line."
I'd love to live in the Star Trek world, where you only have a job if you want a job, because all your needs are met by replicators, computers and other technology. Maybe we can get there eventually, but we're not there yet. Capitalism sucks, but it sucks less than feudalism / manorialism. It also seems to be a system that is actually stable and can exist in the real world. Communism has always collapsed back to authoritarianism whenever it has been tried. It would be great if communism worked in practice, but it doesn't, so we need a realistic alternative until someone invents the replicator. Luckily, while communism always collapses, systems with a mix of socialism and capitalism seem very stable. No country is fully capitalist or fully socialist today, but some of the places where people report being the happiest have a healthy mix of socialism and capitalism. So, while we're searching for a better system, we're stuck with capitalism mixed with some socialism. And it can be better, if we heed the warnings of one of its foundational thinkers and continue fighting to keep the rich fuckers in line.
Your comment simplifies the concepts of communism, socialism, and capitalism so much as to be silly.
Capitalism evolved and gradually formed over time but is viewed as beginning around the 16th century and really cementing itself during the industrial revolution. At what point will we have enough experience of capitalism to know for certain where we're at? Because it's been going a pretty long time and many of us are a bit fed up.
The rich fuckers have never been in line, and they never will be with this Stockholm Syndrome thinking that tries to justify and excuse capitalism and say it can be tempered with a sprinkling of socialism on the side.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_communist_ideologies
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchism#Schools_of_thought
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism#Varieties
So, 200 to 400 years old and still not collapsed. Showing signs of having some problems, but still the predominant form used in the most powerful countries in the world.
Meanwhile communism (or at least the first step on the path to communism) was first attempted in 1922 and lasted (if you're really generous) until 1991, at which point it completely collapsed. In China the communist party took control in 1949 and already in 1978 they had to change it, claiming they could somehow participate in the world's market economy without being capitalist. Since Jiang Zemin the Chair of the Central Military Commission, President of China and General Secretary of the party have all been held by one person. Yet again, a supposedly "communist" system leads to one where one person is in charge of everything who rules until death or a coup.
Maybe corruption is inevitable, but it seems to happen much more completely and much more quickly when a country calls itself "communist".
Congratulations. I have never wanted to downvote the first half of a comment and upvote the second half so much. No arrrows.